Climate and Weather

Of course it is, even hard working smart people come up short everyday. Starting is just a bit easier the less things you have to pay for/deal with. Paying to simply plug into exist utility services is better than having it routed to your location, right? Having educated potential employees is a good thing, right? Having police that protect your business is good, right? Having, by far, the world's largest military to protect the country your business is in is a good thing, right? I could go on and on . . . even you were educated with the help of others.
You have first hand knowledge and experience starting up successful businesses?
How many?
 

Don't let anyone shake you off this site. On the climate stuff there's a gradient, without clear demarcations, from informed skepticism, to suspicion, to cynicism, to political fanboy-ism. The comments on skepticalscience are moderated to remove the bullshit, and if you read through them you can really learn a lot. Some people that really know their stuff post there every once in awhile. Curiosity is really the only thing in short supply in all of this, and if you keep reading you can catch some of it at that site.

For the rest of it, when the bears and the sheep come out, you've pushed the rope up the hill about as far as it will go. Reset. Repeat. If Sisyphus could be turned into an adjective, it would be kind of like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wez
Nice work on the interactive graph.

To be clear, the graph I posted was already on the WFT site. It was not generated using the interactive tools. Its towards the end of the "Notes" menu option, the so-called monster graph. The argument is that once the respective data series are brought into alignment (I suspect this is a partially an outcome of the AH5 and later version algorithms) the different data sets line up pretty nicely. So it isn't me.
 
"Climate change" is an ambiguous term.
If you were more informed, you may understand that there are two sides to the AGW issue.
One believes firmly, that co2 is basically the climate control knob, and that anthropogenic co2 is driving a dangerous warming trend that will have a devastating effect on earth and humanity.
The other side believes that co2 is a bit player in the overall climate, and the effects of anthropogenic co2 are negligible, and probably overshadowed by natural dynamics in the overall climate system

I think a thing to bring up is that is that, of the two "sides" to which you refer, neither is expressly scientific in its viewpoint. They interface with and make reference to science, but they are more quasi-religious than anything else. Thus, the "climate control knob" side is a facet of the Gaia viewpoint of the earth as an integrated ecological system, a living organism to be treated with respect. It is a shamanistic view. A positive feedback amplification view. For myself, I am susceptible to it, but like Lovejoy, ultimately came to see it for the ACC candy that it is. The other side of the same coin, the "bit player" side, is the intelli-design side. Slice it, dice it, stick it in the bottom rack of the dishwasher and it comes out asking for more. This is the negative homeostatic view-climate systems absorb damage. More ACC candy, different flavor.

Science as we know it today is an orphaned tool. It was developed from basic problem solving skills around a philosophical view of the mind that was fundamentally flawed. But the tool works really well. And so in the last decade or so science has basically used the thermal pulse of AGW to track and describe complex mixing processes in the climate system. And as we've seen just on this thread has informed us with respect to positive amplification cycles in the arctic and homeostatic processes in the antarctic. But the questions being posed to science are fundamentally about meaning, not information, and so the whole enterprise is vilified even while we become more and more immersed in a world that science has created. That is the situation we find ourselves in I think.
 
More than a century ago, Roy Farmer, 20, went door-to-door in Los Angeles with his bags of home-roasted coffee beans. By the 1930s, Farmer Brothers was selling coffee to restaurants throughout the nation. Today the company employs 1,200 men and women and generates $200 million in annual sales to restaurants, convenience stores, hospitals, hotels and universities.

But after surviving depressions, recessions, earthquakes and wars, Farmer Brothers is leaving California, finally driven out by high taxes and oppressive regulations.

The company says it’s fleeing in search of a place where business is appreciated. Relocating its corporate headquarters and distribution facilities from to a friendlier location, Farmer Brothers expects to save $15 million a year. Company executives are looking at Dallas and Oklahoma City. The relocation will bear real consequences for California. Nearly 350 workers will lose their well-paying jobs in Los Angeles alone.

Farmer Brothers is following Toyota, whose U.S. sales and marketing headquarters was barely a mile from the company’s main office, and has gone to Texas. Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems, eBay, Occidental Petroleum and firearms retailer RifleGear followed. Nissan bailed to Tennessee.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/editorial-businesses-flee-californias-high-taxes-a/

For every one that leaves, two are knocking on the door. Again, you knock our great State, even as it has given you so much...
 
Of course it is, even hard working smart people come up short everyday. Starting is just a bit easier the less things you have to pay for/deal with. Paying to simply plug into exist utility services is better than having it routed to your location, right? Having educated potential employees is a good thing, right? Having police that protect your business is good, right? Having, by far, the world's largest military to protect the country your business is in is a good thing, right? I could go on and on . . . even you were educated with the help of others.

What you describe is the playing field we all enjoy. Despite the perfect grass and crisp painted lines, the goals in great condition, not everyone succeeds in starting and maintaining a successful business. Even though America gives entrepreneurs the best chance of success (despite what conservatives constantly complain about), very few people are able to start and run a successful business and become rich from it. That still takes special skills and personality traits.
 
For every one that leaves, two are knocking on the door. Again, you knock our great State, even as it has given you so much...

Knocking on the door is one thing having it opened and welcoming is another.
Please site the source for your stat/claim above.
 
CA is doing just fine, despite constant complaints from people who supposedly understand business...

Knocking on the door is one thing having it opened and welcoming is another.
Please site the source for your stat/claim above.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-business-climate-20160102-story.html

"California has spawned new businesses at one of the fastest rates in the nation over the last decade, and faster than the U.S. economy overall, the report found. The state is also a leader in job creation tied to those new businesses: In 2013, California added jobs from newly established businesses faster than all but four other states."
 
So the answer is you have never done what you vlaim is so easy...
Where did I say it's easy? I am saying that our society has provided one of if not the best environments in the world to start a business because of mutually financed (socialism) infrastructure, services, etc. Like always, what you do with that is up to you. Those that have succeeded have done so with the help of others whether you want to admit it or not.
Did they stay up late with you? No
Did they work out all the nuts and bolts? No
Did they help finance it? Well maybe if you took out a loan
Did they educate your employees so they can read and write, yes (hopefully)
The statement the president made was not an attempt to take anything away form those that built businesses, he was telling everyone we have and need to work together as we always have.
"United We Stand, Divided We Fall!"

. . . and the "Have you ever run a business" thing makes as much sense as when nono use to ask all the liberals (never his fellow conservatives, I guess they were exempt?) if they had served in the military as if you hadn't you couldn't comment on any aspect of it.
 
CA is doing just fine, despite constant complaints from people who supposedly understand business...



http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-business-climate-20160102-story.html

"California has spawned new businesses at one of the fastest rates in the nation over the last decade, and faster than the U.S. economy overall, the report found. The state is also a leader in job creation tied to those new businesses: In 2013, California added jobs from newly established businesses faster than all but four other states."
Big government hurts business.
signed, the guy who warned you about government unions.
 
I think a thing to bring up is that is that, of the two "sides" to which you refer, neither is expressly scientific in its viewpoint. They interface with and make reference to science, but they are more quasi-religious than anything else. Thus, the "climate control knob" side is a facet of the Gaia viewpoint of the earth as an integrated ecological system, a living organism to be treated with respect. It is a shamanistic view. A positive feedback amplification view. For myself, I am susceptible to it, but like Lovejoy, ultimately came to see it for the ACC candy that it is. The other side of the same coin, the "bit player" side, is the intelli-design side. Slice it, dice it, stick it in the bottom rack of the dishwasher and it comes out asking for more. This is the negative homeostatic view-climate systems absorb damage. More ACC candy, different flavor.

Science as we know it today is an orphaned tool. It was developed from basic problem solving skills around a philosophical view of the mind that was fundamentally flawed. But the tool works really well. And so in the last decade or so science has basically used the thermal pulse of AGW to track and describe complex mixing processes in the climate system. And as we've seen just on this thread has informed us with respect to positive amplification cycles in the arctic and homeostatic processes in the antarctic. But the questions being posed to science are fundamentally about meaning, not information, and so the whole enterprise is vilified even while we become more and more immersed in a world that science has created. That is the situation we find ourselves in I think.
What do you think the future will look like with this unprecedented runaway, anthropogenic warming?
Is there any hope if we shut down the oil industry?

California has required new ultra low emission water heaters that will only cost you about 40% more than they did last year.
Natural gas not clean enough
I feel better already.
 
What do you think the future will look like with this unprecedented runaway, anthropogenic warming?
Is there any hope if we shut down the oil industry?

California has required new ultra low emission water heaters that will only cost you about 40% more than they did last year.
Natural gas not clean enough
I feel better already.

The low emission water heaters are aimed at oxides of nitrogen - the stuff that makes smog. Cars with catalytic converters can't get much lower NOx, and electric cars emit none whatsoever. Air quality managers are shooting at the biggest remaining sources, and 0lder water heaters are a big one.
 
Back
Top