5 ms·

Kinda funny, when I inadvertently buy a TV show or movie that features global warming propaganda, I donate the same amount of money to Climate Audit or Bishop H

by guscost 14y ago

Kinda funny, when I inadvertently buy a TV show or movie that features global warming propaganda, I donate the same amount of money to Climate Audit or Bishop Hill.

vl 14y ago
Just to clarify, you think that there is no "climat change" a.k.a. "global warming"?
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  There is a wide gulf between "thinking that there is no climate change" and agreeing with the politicization of the issue at every opportunity by authors, actors, and journalists who often are not particularly well-informed on the subject. Your comment's actually a pretty good illustration of the effect the grandparent is (probably) talking about.
- guscost 14y ago
  CamperBob2 gets it. You're playing with a straw man and a neologism.
lancewiggs 14y ago
I have to admit it is quite astonishing to see someone denying climate change is a huge issue on a site dedicated to computer-logic based businesses that are future-focused, a site populated by many under 30. Climate change is the primary challenge for the next few generations, and once we move on from 'debate' we see that there are a wealth of opportunities in mitigation, reduction of CO2 output and coping with the impact. Just ask Elon Musk.
- guscost 14y ago
  I emphatically disagree with the "overwhelming judgement of science" when it comes to this issue. And I'm thoroughly disgusted by the profiteering that accompanies the global warming campaign. Let's see who is in denial 20 years from now. Permalink For Great Justice: http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to
  - ZenoArrow 14y ago
    Permalink for Great Justice? Here's a graph from 1970 (rather than 1990), using a more up to date version of the database you referred to... http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1970/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1970/to Notice the upward trend? Let's go back even further, to 1900... http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to The upward trend in temperature is clear, the question then becomes why it is happening. What is your theory on this?
    - CamperBob2 14y ago
      What is your theory on this? I don't have one, but what is your theory on this? http://i.imgur.com/5hPqZQh.png http://i.imgur.com/5hPqZQh.png Now, here's the whole 12-hour graph, rather than just a three minute excerpt from the very end: http://i.imgur.com/npSuZd9.png http://i.imgur.com/npSuZd9.png Whatever your theory was, does it still hold up?
      - ZenoArrow 14y ago
        What data is plotted on these graphs? Phase difference of what?
        CamperBob2 14y ago
        In this case, a cesium-beam frequency standard (aka atomic clock.) The specific data source isn't as important as the noise processes that it exhibits -- in this case a combination of white and random-walk frequency noise. The latter noise type alters the phase slope over multiple timeframes at once, even though the slope is accurately known over the long term. The usual metaphor is a drunk person looking for his lost car keys. He meanders around under the streetlight because that's the only place where he can see where he's going. He won't stray very far from the lamp post, but his direction at any given time has little or no correlation to either his past or future behavior. It's easy to fool yourself into thinking you understand what's going on based on recent historical behavior, but in reality, the presence of random-walk noise means that it's impossible to infer anything about long-term trends or short-term biases by looking at short-term trends. In climate science, even a hundred thousand years' worth of data is still a "short term" record. We need better data, we need better models, and most important, we need to give ourselves time to evaluate them on the basis of their predictive power. Based on my own experience watching random-walk processes in real time, someone who expects me to take action based on the last 100 years of data from a multi-billion year timeframe is just going to get laughed at. I've spent so much time fooling myself (that's my software, and my cesium standard) that I probably am erring on the side of too much skepticism.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- sp332 14y ago
  You shouldn't be too surprised. Odd politics are rampant in computer science. Stallman, Chomsky, etc.
- bitcartel 14y ago
  Ask Freeman Dyson, he might surprise you. [1] http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2151 http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2151 [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?pa...
Snoptic 14y ago
What movies have this?
- guscost 14y ago
  The first episode of The Walking Dead comes to mind. I'd also volunteer Waterworld and The Day After Tomorrow, but those are a bit too obvious and not worth the money.

by guscost 14y ago

Kinda funny, when I inadvertently buy a TV show or movie that features global warming propaganda, I donate the same amount of money to Climate Audit or Bishop Hill.

vl 14y ago

Just to clarify, you think that there is no "climat change" a.k.a. "global warming"?

CamperBob2 14y ago
There is a wide gulf between "thinking that there is no climate change" and agreeing with the politicization of the issue at every opportunity by authors, actors, and journalists who often are not particularly well-informed on the subject. Your comment's actually a pretty good illustration of the effect the grandparent is (probably) talking about.
guscost 14y ago
CamperBob2 gets it. You're playing with a straw man and a neologism.

lancewiggs 14y ago

I have to admit it is quite astonishing to see someone denying climate change is a huge issue on a site dedicated to computer-logic based businesses that are future-focused, a site populated by many under 30. Climate change is the primary challenge for the next few generations, and once we move on from 'debate' we see that there are a wealth of opportunities in mitigation, reduction of CO2 output and coping with the impact. Just ask Elon Musk.

guscost 14y ago
I emphatically disagree with the "overwhelming judgement of science" when it comes to this issue. And I'm thoroughly disgusted by the profiteering that accompanies the global warming campaign. Let's see who is in denial 20 years from now. Permalink For Great Justice: http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to
- ZenoArrow 14y ago
  Permalink for Great Justice? Here's a graph from 1970 (rather than 1990), using a more up to date version of the database you referred to... http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1970/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1970/to Notice the upward trend? Let's go back even further, to 1900... http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to The upward trend in temperature is clear, the question then becomes why it is happening. What is your theory on this?
  - CamperBob2 14y ago
    What is your theory on this? I don't have one, but what is your theory on this? http://i.imgur.com/5hPqZQh.png http://i.imgur.com/5hPqZQh.png Now, here's the whole 12-hour graph, rather than just a three minute excerpt from the very end: http://i.imgur.com/npSuZd9.png http://i.imgur.com/npSuZd9.png Whatever your theory was, does it still hold up?
    - ZenoArrow 14y ago
      What data is plotted on these graphs? Phase difference of what?
      - CamperBob2 14y ago
        In this case, a cesium-beam frequency standard (aka atomic clock.) The specific data source isn't as important as the noise processes that it exhibits -- in this case a combination of white and random-walk frequency noise. The latter noise type alters the phase slope over multiple timeframes at once, even though the slope is accurately known over the long term. The usual metaphor is a drunk person looking for his lost car keys. He meanders around under the streetlight because that's the only place where he can see where he's going. He won't stray very far from the lamp post, but his direction at any given time has little or no correlation to either his past or future behavior. It's easy to fool yourself into thinking you understand what's going on based on recent historical behavior, but in reality, the presence of random-walk noise means that it's impossible to infer anything about long-term trends or short-term biases by looking at short-term trends. In climate science, even a hundred thousand years' worth of data is still a "short term" record. We need better data, we need better models, and most important, we need to give ourselves time to evaluate them on the basis of their predictive power. Based on my own experience watching random-walk processes in real time, someone who expects me to take action based on the last 100 years of data from a multi-billion year timeframe is just going to get laughed at. I've spent so much time fooling myself (that's my software, and my cesium standard) that I probably am erring on the side of too much skepticism.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
sp332 14y ago
You shouldn't be too surprised. Odd politics are rampant in computer science. Stallman, Chomsky, etc.
bitcartel 14y ago
Ask Freeman Dyson, he might surprise you. [1] http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2151 http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2151 [2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?pa...

Snoptic 14y ago

What movies have this?

guscost 14y ago
The first episode of The Walking Dead comes to mind. I'd also volunteer Waterworld and The Day After Tomorrow, but those are a bit too obvious and not worth the money.